Guidance on how to efficiently find, choose, and use available systematic reviews was developed

• Published in: Journal of clinical epidemiology Vol. 173; p. 111466
• Main Authors: Mathes, Tim, Prien, Peggy, Klerings, Irma, Ewald, Hannah, Dressler, Corinna, Harder, Thomas, Scheibler, Fülöp, Büchter, Roland, Braun, Cordula, Grummich, Kathrin, Eikermann, Michaela, Schaefer, Corinna, Pieper, Dawid
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01.09.2024; Elsevier Limited
• Subjects: Algorithms; Clinical medicine; Evidence synthesizes; Evidence-Based-Medicine; Group dynamics; Guidelines; Health technology assessment; Immunization; Information resources; Information sources; Literature searching; Professionals; Public health; Questions; Redundant reviews; Study selection; Systematic reviews; Working groups; Germany; Systematic reviews; Evidence-Based-Medicine; Evidence synthesizes; Literature searching; Study selection; Redundant reviews; study selection; literature searching; redundant reviews
• ISSN: 0895-4356; 1878-5921; 1878-5921
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2024.111466

The aim of this paper is to provide clinicians and authors of clinical guidelines or patient information with practical guidance on searching and choosing systematic reviews(s) (SR[s]) and, where adequate, on making use of SR(s). At the German conference of the Evidence-Based Medicine Network (EbM Network) a workshop on the topic was held to identify the most important areas where guidance for practice appears necessary. After the workshop, we established working groups. These included SR users with different backgrounds (eg, information specialists, epidemiologists) and working areas. Each working group developed and consented a draft guidance based on their expert knowledge and experiences. The results were presented to the entire group and finalized in an iterative process. We developed a practical guidance that answers questions that usually arise when choosing and using SR(s). (1) How to efficiently find high-quality SRs? (2) How to choose the most appropriate SR? (3) What to do if no SR of sufficient quality could be identified? In addition, we developed an algorithm that links these steps and accounts for their interaction. The resulting guidance is primarily directed at clinicians and developers of clinical practice guidelines or patient information resources. We suggest practical guidance for making the best use of SRs when answering a specific research question. The guidance may contribute to the efficient use of existing SRs. Potential benefits when using existing SRs should be always weighted against potential limitations.